








.^•' 







'. -^^ .^ 



-^^^ ►t^it./'^... .> .!:.^*. V. .-j.*^^ 







P^v;«k.>o ^/\-^i.% /..r^-.-'-o. 






-^^o^ 












/\ '^ 










. *• A 



























^<b--^^ W^^; ^^^\ \^^/ .5''^'"''^^ -.^^W* '^^' ^^ '^ 




SPEECH 



OF 



HON. JOHN J. PEAKCE, 



OF PENNSYLVANIA, 



^ i 



ON 



THE SLAVERY QUESTION 



DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES, AUGUST 9, 1856. 

« — __ _____ 



WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 

1856. 



^A3^ 



<?-ii 



.V 






THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 



The House being in the Committee of the Whole on the 
«tate of the Union — 1 

Mr. PEARCEsaid: j 

Mr. Chairman: I have been desirous, for a 
long time, to express my views and feelinf^s on 
the great question that is agitating this mighty 
nation from its center to its circumference, but- 
my feeble health has prevented tlie execution of 
that purpose until the present time; and even now 
I find myself so much debilitated that I can hardly 
hope to carry out my desire successfully. | 

Sir, my feelings are deeply interested in the 
absorbing question; and while I shall at least 
attempt to say something expressive of the senti- 
ments of my constituents, it is not ray intention 
10 add fuel to the fire. No, I am free to say that 
a. spirit of an inflammatory character has been 
manifested to too great an extent by both sides of 
tlie House; and I would much rather, were I able, 
pour oil upon the wounds than deepen or aggra- 
vate them. 

Our common and beloved country is at this 
lime in a state of excitement that'is indeed alarm- 
ing; never before was it equaled. There may 
have been as much feeling and bitterness in other 
years, both in this House and in the other end of 
the Capitol, by the representatives of the people, 
when the question of slavery extension was being 
discussed, and when that question had reached a 
crisis. But, sir, the feeling and excitement then 
were, comparatively speaking, confined there; 
now, the mighty people are moved; they are like 
the ocean, blown into tempestuous commotion by 
the fury-winds of heaven. Yes, sir, all that has 
passed heretofore, is only as " the cloud no larger 
than a man's hand" — but look you now: see how 
that cloud has increased until it darkens the whole 
heavens, and East, West, North, and South, you 
see the flood is coming! Yes, the great crisis 
has arrived, and must be met; and, Mr. Chairman, 
what is the cause of this lamentable state of 
things? You see the two great sections of the 
country battling with each other. A mighty strug- 
gle is going on; and I ask for what.' And let the 
answer go home to every American's heart like 
a thunderbolt: It is a struggle between slave labor 
and free labor; and that not in the States where 
slavery is established, but in the Territories which 



are held in common by the Union ! You may 
look at the question in whatever light you please; 
you may connect with it other side issues, but, 
sir, it resolves itself into this one question: shall 
slave labor or free labor succeed in the Territo- 
ries? Our southern brethren have reasons and 
interests which prompt them to toil that slave 
labor may succeed; and the North, the West, and 
the East, have reasons for struggling that free 
labor may prevail; and, sir, I propose to notice, in 
a general way, the reasons of both. 

The great question of the South is that of self- 
interest. Every new slave State runs up a hand- 
some per centum upon every negro owned in the 
South, by creating a demand for them; and as 
the principal weaUh of the South consists in hold- 
ing human beings in bondage, (the right or the 
justice of which I have neither the time nor the 
inclination to discuss at present,) the more slave 
territory that is added to the Union, the greater 
the demand; and of course the institution, which 
;they say, and say truly, was entailed on them, 
spreads in a corresponding ratio, with all its 
national evils. 

j But the South has another reason why they 
desire slave labor to succeed, and it is this: that 
■they may maintain their representative strength 
in the Senate and House. On what other ques- 
tion does the North and South differ about, to 
make them jealous of superior numbers in their 
representative force, any more than the East and 
the West? Does the North or the West com- 
plain when either adds to their representative 
strength ? No; nor would the South, were it not 
for the slavery question. Does not, then, this 
! second reason resolve itself into the first? And is 
not the great absorbing and only reason of the 
South for extending slavery, self-interest — the 
desire of gain, in extending a demand and a mar- 
ket for a tratHc injhuman beings— the extension 
of an institution now violently demanded as a 
right by the South, which eminent southern states- 
men, though dead, yet living in the memories of 
the people, have denounced as a national curse.* 

The reasons of the North are more numerous 
and more varied. There are in the Northafev, 
and, sir, I may say but few, who arc Abolition- 
ists — real, bonafide Abolitionists, who would not 
only interdict slavery in the Terriiorics, but ex- 



tirpate it in the States, regardless of constitutional 
rights or social consequences. They found their 
hostility upon 'he conviction that the institution is 
a sin against God. They class it with the worst 
of sins, and in their misguided zeal would support 
measures to procure its abolishment everywhere, 
without regard to consequences. But, sir, I have 
said there are but few in the North, and I will 
say they are fewer now than in former years. If 
I understand the principles of that other party in 
the North, the East, and the West, now almost 
as the stars in heaven for numbers, which you 
haveseenfit to call the " Black Republican, "they, 
as a party, have no sympathy with those Abo- 
lition mad-caps. No, sir, our patriotism rises 
above our prejudices; and, though opposed to 
slavery in the abstract, we are willing to stand by 
and maintain the compromises of the Constitution 
as enacted and established by our fathers. We 
are not disposed to interfere with it in the States 
where it is already established, because it is se- 
cured by the compromises of the Constitution. 
We will teach our southern brethren by our ex- 
ample some regard for the sacredness of plighted 
faith — of the inviolability of compromises. But in 
the Territories where slavery docs not exist — 
where it was absolutely prohibited by a com- 
promise which has been ruthlessly and wantonly 
destroyed, we are determined to exercise our con- 
stitutional rights as freemen to prevent and pro- 
hibit its introduction. Who does not know that, 
with these conservative views, this party, stig- 
matized as " Black Republicans," has alike in- 
curred the displeasure, condemnation, and spleen 
of the Abolitionists and pro-slavery advocates.' 

Then, sir, there are others in the North, who 
think with many good people in the South, that 
slavery is wrong — that it is an evil that has been 
entailed on them, and one for which they are not 
responsible; and let me tell gentlemen here from 
the South, that the great mass of the Republican 
party do not condemn them because their section 
is blighted with what we think an evil, moral, 
social, and national. No, sir, we would rather 
sympathize with you than condemn you. We 
know how this great curse (as we think it is) came 
upon you, and we are ready to defend your con- 
stitutional rights in the States, and even the insti- 
tution we would so much dread ourselves, know- 
ing that you have been educated in the midst of 
it, and that all your sympathies and interests are 
identified with it. But, as 1 said before, we are 
opposed to spreading an evil into virgin soil 
"where the excuse that it has been entailed cannot 
"he set up or urged. 

But perhaps the great reason why the North, 
the East, and the West, oppose the extension of 
BJavery, maybe characterized as twofold; thatis, 
self-preservation, and national pride. In view 
of these two sentiments, which pervade every 
rational and honest heart, let me ask, what good 
has the institution of slavery ever done for our 
country, to command our admiration or our 
approbation? In answering this question, we 
will necessarily have to answer another: it is, 
what evil has it done.' But how can we best 
answer these questions.' I imagine, by contrast- 
ing the North, where slavery does not exist, with 
the South, where it has its uninterrupted sway. 
And what is the contrast .' What is the difference 
in point of population.' Does not the North out- 



number the South almost ten to one .' Why thi.s 
difference.' Is the South not as old as the North.' 
Then why, I ask, this discrepancy in numbers? 
Is it not because of the blighting influences of 
slavery? What is the difference in a commercial 
point of view? Have we not a great preponder- 
ance over the South ? and has not the latter the 
same natural advantages for commercial opera- 
tions? What is the difference in agricultural pur- 
suits, or products? Examine the agricultural 
statistics of the North and South, and compare 
them, and see if there is not in the result an argu- 
ment perfectly irresistible in favor of free labor. 
Now look at the almost incredible difference 
between the North and the South in point of 
manufacturing interests, and see what a sad 
commentary you find against slave labor when 
compared with free labor. Again, look, if you 
please, at the difference between the North and 
the South in point of internal improvements. 
Why, who does not know that the South is fifty 
years behind the North, in this respect ? And has 
slavery had nothing to do with making this dif- 
ference ? See also the contrast between the North 
and the South in point of revenue to the General 
Government. Will you look at these statistics, 
and see? Would that all might not only look 
and see, but feel the truth, that the difference 
between free labor and slave labor is as the dif- 
ference between the light of day and the darkness 
of the night. 

These, Mr. Chairman, are some of the reasons 
why the North is opposed to slave labor, and 
thus seek to introduce free, instead of slave labor 
into the new States — a labor that gives to freedom 
such a superiority in numbers, in commerce, in 
manufactures, in agriculture, in internal improve- 
ments, and in ability to give a revenue to the 
General Government. 

Now, if this contrast is a true one — if these 
statistics do not lie, it is a matter of self-preser- 
vation with the North, that slave labor should not 
be introduced into the new States, for this obvious 
reason: the northern States have their teeming 
millions, whilst.the South has but a sparse pop- 
ulation; and how rapidly are the former increas- 
ing in numbers, not only by a natural process, 
but look at the millions of foreigners crowding 
our shores, and seeking in this great nation a 
home. 

Now, how long, at this ratio, will it be before 
we are pressed with a population as dense as that 
of the Old World; and do you not observe that 
this great foreign element do not, and will not, 
locate themselves in slave States ? There is plenty 
of room for them there, and an abundance of 
vacant or unoccupied land that might be purchased 
at a low rate; but they touch it not, because they 
have their own notions of slavery, and associate 
with it the idea of tyranny and oppression; and 
I it was this that led them to leave their own coun- 
try to find a home in the land of liberty. Again, 
they will not go to slave States, because most of 
them are poor, and are seeking employment, and 
they find it not there. And let me ask, Mr. 
Chairman, what has given our country its great 
glory and superiority over other nations? First, 
it is because of our republican form of govern- 
ment; and secondly, it is because of the length 
and breadth of our Territories, the facilities of- 
fered to the poor of going to a new country, and 



making themselves rich, and providiiis; abund- 
antly for their growing; families. Why, sir, a 
poor man from the JVortli, or a foreisrner comings: 
to this country, with five hundred dollars in his 
pocket, can go to Nebraska, or to Kansas, if it is a 
free State, and investing his little all in lands, by 
industry and economy, make a comfortable living, 
and in a few years, when he ii;is passed the me- 
ridian of life, and iiis children have come toman- 
hood, he finds himself not only independent, but 
his whole family well provided for; the country 
has been populated, improvements have been 
made, and he and hia family iiave grown up with 
the country, become identified with it, and feel, 
as I have said, like independent freemen But 
would it be so were slavery introduced there ? Is 
it so in slave States? No! Look at the great 
free West, and tell me what it would have been 
if the institution of slavery had been introduced 
and tolerated. Her glory then would only be as 
the faint glimmering of a star in the dark cloud, 
to the brilliancy of the unobscured sun. 

I have said, sir, that it is with the North a mat- 
ter of self-preservation that compels an opposi- 
tion to the introduction of slavery into the Terri- 
tories; and I ask, wlien you look at our immense 
and increasing native population, in connection 
with the great foreign population coming in upon 
us like a flood, and both their interests alike an- 
tagonistic to tlie extension of slavery, do I not 
represent the facts and condition of things fairly 
and truly? I have also said that national pride 
has influenced the North in iis opposition to the 
extension of slavery; and where is the Ameri- 
can who does not, from his national pride, feel 
prompted to oppose every obstacle that stands in 
the way of national growth and expansion in 
population, commerce, agriculture, and general 
wealth ? Sir, I need not repeat that other reason, 
assigned by others— the imperative duty of re- 
moving from us, so far as we can constitutionally, 
that which has made us, in the eyes of other 
nations, a hissing and a by-word. Sir, \ have 
heard it said repeatedly on tlie floor of this House, 
that if the party wiio advocate the doctrine of free 
labor in the Territories, or who are opposed to 
the extension of slavery, should succeed, that the 
Union would be dissolved, and I confess that 1 
have been amazed at these declarations. Now, if 
the party opposing the extension of slavery into 
the Territories were laboring to disturb that insti- 
tution where it already exists in the States, and 
where it has existed' coeval with the Republic 
itself, then I could make some allowance for such 
a threat. But I have neither known nor heard of 
any attempt to be made by this party upon the 
institution where it exists. On the other hand, 
this party is as much opposed to any interference 
of this kind as any poliiical party in the country; 
their only opposition is to its extension — an op- 
position invited and legalized, if illegal before, by 
the Kansas and Nebniska bill repealing the Mis- 
souri compnmiise. In that bill the friends of the 
measure declare that it is the true intent and 
meaning of the act not to legislate slavery into or 
out of the Territory, but to leave the people free 
to say whether they will have slavery or not. 
This act only reiterated a right which we always 
had, and, ihoughiiis believed that the declaration 
in the bill was made in duplicity, we claim the 
right, as a portion of the people, to say that sla- 



very shall not go into the Territories. In the face 
of the declaration thus made in the Kansas bill 
by the fi-iends of slavery, I would ask, is the in- 
c^ease of slave territory the only terms on which 
the Union can be maintained? Is it so, that the 
fair lands of the West are to be appropriated to 
slave-breeding, and their wealth and jiromising 
advantages thereby blighted, as the only condi- 
tion of niaintaiiiing the Union? Why, sir, the 
North has been charged with fanaticism on this 
subject. Is there no fanaticism in such declara- 
tions or conditions ? Dissolve the Union because 
slavery cannot be extended ! What has it done 
that it should l)e magnified into such imjiortance? 
Will some one writi; or sjieak its eulogy? Has 
It not cursed your soil, |iaralyzed the increase of 
j yonr population, produced indolence amongyour 
1 white population, and created indigence and mis- 
lery? Are not these and other charges made 
.against the " institution" true? and yet is it so, 
that it must be spread into the Territories, or the 
I Union be divided? Would it not come with a 
I better grace from the North, with her crowding 
j population and her increasing enterprise, to say, 
I that if slavery shall interpose its blighting, witn- 
I ering influence into the Territories, and there ex- 
clude her white population, the Union shall be 
dissolved? Yet the North says no such thing; 
and I hofte she never will so far forget the mem- 
ories of her revered ancestors, or the iilood they 
poured out in the battles of the Revolution, as to 
be guilty of any such consummate folly. 

But, Mr. Chairman, notwithstanding these 
threats, the people of the free States are in earn- 
est, and their determination is as immovable as 
the everlasting hills are firmly fixed; and I would 
say in all kindness and frankness to gentlemen 
here from the South, that they have but an im- 
perfect idea of the extent of the anti-slavery ex- 
tension spirit of the people of the North. A great 
contest is now going on in the nation for the Pres- 
idency; and if gentlemen here think that the Re- 
publican sentiment is confined to the friends of 
Mr. Fremont, they are greatly mistaken. No, 
sir, the feeling is almost as general among the 
friends of Mr. Fillmore. Why, sir, in the North, 
the American party, in many ]ilaces, when calling 
a Fillmore and Donelson meeting, head the hand- 
bills " Friends of fri'edom, rally!" — and we call 
ourselves the American Republican party. Nor 
is tlie opposition to slave labor alone to be found 
among the friends of Fillniore and Fremont; for, 
strange as it may seem, many others are in favor 
of the views of this same despised Black Repub- 
lican parly who go in for Buchanan, and you will 
see the evidence of it in tiie future. Yes, many 
hitherto good and true Democrats are to be found 
who tell you thc-y intend to vote for Buchanan, 
but further the deponent saith not; others spit 
upon th(! platform, and go for Buchanan, forget- 
ting that tin; saliva falls upon the venerable sage 
himself, for he is no more James Buchanan, hav- 
ing lost jiis identity in the platform. Many 
have lost not only their identity, but even their 
lives, upon platforms. Others .say nothing, but 
will do something, no doubt, in November; and, 
sir, a goodly number of others aver tiiat they vvill 
not sup|>oriany man who stands on the; Cincin- 
nati platform, and they will vote, aouK^ for Fill- 
more, and soiTie for Fremont; and then this spirit 
is increasing, and what it may be by the coming 



6 



election is yet to be seen. It is due, however, 
from me to state, that the friends of Mr. Fillmore 
think themselves more conservative tlian those of 
Mr. Fremont. But, sir, this is a great mistake. 
On this great question there can be no conserva- 
tism. Hovvcai^ there be? What is the question? 
It is this: Are you in favor of extending slavery, 
or are you opposed to it? Who can show me 
an intermediate position? Neither would inter- 
fere with slavery in the States — yet both are 
equally opposed to an extension of the evil, and 
both, as they suppose, are resorting to the same 
lawful means to prevent it. Where, then, I ask, 
is the conservatism? I cannot see it; and if the 
success of the Black Republican party would dis- 
solve the Union, why would not the triumph of 
the American Republican party, who avow the 
same principles, and are laboring to accomplish 
the same end, in the same way? 

But it is not my purpose, in these remarks, to 
make political capital for, or against, either of 
the candidates, but simply to correct an impres- 
sion that some have received, that the free-soil 
strength of the North is all to be found in the 
Fremont party. No, sir; and if many were not 
deceiving themselves, and all the anti-slavery- 
extension men were to unite, every northern State 
would report such majorities as would astonish 
and amaze the whole nation; and, sir, the iime is 
very near at hand wlien, if slavery i.*^ -Xtended 
by the means which have been resorted to in 
Kansas, all the free States will be a unit on 
that subject; party drill or affinities will be too 
feeble to prevent it. If such means are repeated, 
and sanctioned by the Administration, every other 
question will become subordinate to this one in 
the North, without distinction of party. And, 
now, Mr. Chairman, what sane man does not 
know that the present storm, increasing in vio- 
lence every hour, and threatening danger, is the 
fruitful and legitimate offspring of Democratic 
legislation? Wliat was the condition of the coun- 
try before the "little giant" of the West, as his 
party is pleased to call him, laid his vile and bar- 
barous hand on that sacred compact and compro- 
mise, made by the united wisdom and patriotism 
of our fathers, and tore it asunder with the ruthless 
ignorance or wickedness with which the savage 
of the plains rends the beautiful and harmonious 
mechanism of the watch to sport its wiieels as 
ornaments? By this ill-timed and uncalled-for am- 
bitious act he opened the flood-gates of excitement, 
sectional animosities, civil war, and bloodshed. 
Was not the country, sir, in peace and harmony? 
Why, sir, the old wounds were healed by this 
balm,. and time had effectually effaced even the 
ecars; and the country was like the setting sun, 
without an intervening cloud. The storm had 
long since jjassed, and all was quiet. And, sir, 
1 ask, for what was the compromise violated? 
Gentlemen from the South have rejieatediy said 
here that they did not ask for it — that it was a 
northern measure, pressed upon them, and they 
would have been unwise to have repelled the 
proffered boon. Sir, the secret is here: that same 
"little giant," that has almost doubly damned 
the once great and pure Democratic party, and 
stamped upon it ihe broad seal of infamy, led by 
a reckless, itching ambition, attempted a chef 
d'auvre for the cluef executive ofiice of this great 
nation, which was to prostrate every rival, and 



leave him alone in the line of promotion He was 
playing the Bonaparte — snatching the crown from 
the Pope, and placing it on his brow with his own 
hands. The destruction of the peace of the United 
States was a bold undertaking for a small man. 
A gnat can worry a huge elephant into a storm 
of rage. It is much easier to tear down and de- 
stroy, than to build up. The "little giant" was 
but too successful in destroying the Missouri 
compromise, and setting the country on fire. A 
weak and passive Administration rather aided 
than imposed a barrier to the consumination of 
this purpose. But the "little giant" and the head 
of this Administration have been indignantly 
repudiated by tlie country— repudiated even by 
that portion of the Democratic party South, whos* 
favor and influence the reckless act was perpe- 
trated to conciliate and secure. 

And now, sir, what is this great Nebraska 
Kansas bill ? Who will tell me what I am to un- 
derstand by it? In the North, we are told by 
the leading exponents of Democracy that it 
means squatter sovereignty, or popular sover- 
eignty — the right of the people of a Territory 
to govern themselves; and this was the plausible 
and deceptive argument used during the passage 
of the bill. Senators from the South urged that 
it could not be productive of slave States, be- 
cause they were weak, few in numbers, whilst 
the North had her hundreds of thousands of sur- 
plus population, and would always have the ma- 
jority. And further, they urged that slavery never 
could go to Kansas; that the climate and soil 
were such as to render slave labor unprofitable- 
Northern Senators, participators in the act, went 
a step further, and declared on the stump, in the 
canvass following, that the repeal of the Missouri 
compromise would not only make Kansas free, 
but would carry freedom south, to the Isthmus 
of Darien ! But now, sir, this doctrine of squat- 
ter or popular sovereignly is denied by gentle- 
men from the South, or rather its construction or 
interpretation is disputed — one branch insisting 
that it confers the right upon the residents, or in- 
terlopers, at any time, and without regard to 
numbers, to establish permanent rules and prin- 
ciples, which shall bind and govern all who may 
thereafter seek a home in it; while another branch 
says it confers the right to do so only when the 
population assumes a magnitude in numbers 
qualifying it for admission in the Union as a 
State. General Cass ranges himself with the 
class who advocate the first branch of construc- 
tion. The General is honest, and thinks there 
can be no discrimination as to the time when the 
right commences, if the right is conceded at alL 
Southern gentlemen embrace and adojH the sec- 
ond branch of construction. But, ask the Demo- 
cratic party's "little giant," the father of the 
bill, his views, and what does he say? Why, 
sir, in perfect keeping with his usual duplicity, 
he dodges an expression of opinion, and says it 
is a judicial question, and not one for him to an- 
swer. His is the non-commiital of the fox, who 
informed his majesty, the lion, when invited to 
express an opinion of the odor of his den, thai 
he had "a bad cold, and couldn't smell at all, 
at all." 

Sir, we have the Kansas-Nebraska bill, with all 
its beautiful results; and the very party ihat pre- 
pared it, cannot agree as to what it means. The 



North contends that it is an exemplification of 
the great doctrine of squatter sovereio;nty ; and 
the South, that it is standing evidence that Con- 
gress has no power to legislate upon the subject 
of slaverV) and that they have a right to go into 
the Territories, and to take with them the insti- 
tution of slavery, just as the North has the right 
to take with them any species of property they 
may possess. In the agitation of this doctrine of 
squatter sovereignly, and the denial of any right 
in Congress to interfere in the Territories, we 
should remember, that there is a Territory lying 
beyond, but adjacent to, Kansas and Nebraska, 
watching our movements, and wailing to take ad- 
vantage of the doctrine of squatter sovereignty, 
to introduce themselves into the Union with the 
institution of polygamy as a part of their political 
and religious rights. I refer to the Territory of 
Utah. In this case the new doctrine may place 
some members in an awkward predicament. 

Now, sir, if there beany meaning at all in the 
Kansas bill, it is that the people of a Territory 
are to decide for themselves whether they will or 
will not have slavery — it is ^jopular sovereignty; 
and whatever other views the party with which 
I am acting may take, I, speaking for myself 
only, with this interpretation of the bill, am ready 
to meet and fight the great question by it, and I 
am sure of success with but half a chance. I do 
not mean to say, that the principle laid down in 
the Nebraska bill is my preference. No, I believe 
the restoration of the Missouri compromise would 
be far better; but the South say, " If you restore 
the compromise, then we will dissolve the Union. " 
Very good. Then let us meet the question on the 
principle of popular sovereignty, and I am sure 
It will lead to the same thing. It must be so. 
What does the bill say .' In effect it says: Now, 
here is a new Territory; if the North can send 
more emigrants into it than the South, then shall 
the Territory be free: on the other hand, if the 
South can outnumberand outvote the North, then 
is the Territory to be made a slave State. And, 
Mr. Chairman, who does not see, that as the 
North and the South are deeply interested in the 
question — not only interested in it, but in many 
places excited almost to desperation, that both 
will pour in their population until the Territory 
cannot supply their actual wants. The South and 
the North will meet with all their interested feel- 
ings and prejudices; every means, honest and dis- 
honest, will be resorted to to defeat each other; 
and can you imagine that they can settle the ques- 
tion without the shedding of blood? No, sir; 
and the first blow will lead to a general engage- 
ment; and what though you have an army there, 
the emigration will far surpass it. Now, if the 
Union must be dissolved in the event of the res- 
toration of the Missouri compromise, then, sir, 
as the question must be met, I go for the Kansas- 
Nebraska bill, meaning as it does the doctrine of 
popular sovereignty; and if you ask me what 
then are the chances of free labor, I tell you 
they are as the chances of thirteen millions to 
six millions, and I do not blame our southern 
friends for cursing the doctrine of squatter sove- 
reignty. 

This, to my mind, Mr. Chairman, is a dark 

ricture, look at it in any aspect you please, and 
trust in God some other means may yet be 
presented that will drive away the threatening 



ruin; and let me ask, what claim has the South 
on Kansas? Do they not seek to establish their 
institution there in violation of the compromise? 
Let us examine for a moment, and see how the 
slave and the free States stand, as to the propor- 
tion of territory ceded to, and occupied by each, 
as acquired by the General Government. As the 
exact area of our territorial acquisitions cannot 
bo made, I will give their cost, and then see how 
they are divided: 

TerritDry of Louisiana (purchased from France 

ill the year 1803) ^l.'ijOOOjOOO 

Interest paid 8,327,353 

Florida, (purchased of Spain) 5,000,000 

Interest liaid 1 ,-130,000 

Texas, (for boundarv) 10,000,000 

Texas, (for indemnity) 10,000,000 

Texas, (for creditors, last ('ongrcss) TjT.WjOOO 

Indian expenses of all kinds, (say) 5,000,000 

To purchase navy, pay troops, &e 5,000,000 

All other expenditures 3,000,000 

Evpense of the Mexican war 217,175,575 

iSoldiers' pensions, and bounty lands, &c., (say) 15,000,000 

Exppiii-es of the Florida war, (say) 100,000,000 

Soldiers' pensions, bounty lands, &c., (say) . . . 7,000,000 
To remove Indians, suppress hostilities, &c., 

(sav) 5,000,000 

Paid bv treaty, for New Mexico 15,000,000 

Paid to extineiiish Indian titles, (say) 100,000,000 

Paid to Georgia 3,082,000 

$832,764,928 



Many of the above items can be accurately 
stated; others can only be estimated. But our 
acquisitions of territory have cost us an immense 
amount, and led to large expenditures. Theabove 
is merely an approximation towards it. The ex- 
pense of the Mexican war is given as slated offi- 
cially by the Secretary of the Treasury in his re- 
port in 1851. (See Appendix to Globe, volume 
23, page 21.) This was, as Mr. Clay said in his 
great speech in 1850, a war " made essentially 
by the South, growing out of our annexation of 
Texas;" a war into which the country was pre- 
cipated by the action of a southern President; 
a war of conquest, which Congress declared " was 
unnecessarily and unconstitutionally begun by 
the President of the United States." 

It was at the instance of the slaveholding sec- 
tion of the Union, and for its immediate benefit, 
that all our purchases of foreign territory have 
been made. It was most emphatically the South, 
and the voice of "southern councils," that led 
to the acquisition of Louisiana, Florida, Texas, 
and New Mexico; and as it regards all sectional 
issues — all questions of political ascendency — all 
these acquisitions of territory have been made, 
and have operated, for the direct and immediate 
benefits of the slaveholding Stales. 

Not one inch of territory has ever been pur- 
chased or acquired of any foreign Power, since 
the Constitution was adopted, at the instance of 
the free-States, or which was intended for their 
benefit. 

Yet the free States have paid more than two 
thirds of the entire cost of all these acquisitions 
of territory, and the consequent expenditures 
since incurred. They have borne their full share 
in the wars which led to, or resulted from, these 
acquisitions, in the expenditure of money, and in 
the sacrifice of human life. 

How has the purchased territory been divided.' 
From the territory thus purchased, and paid for 
by all the States, /ive new slave Stales have been 



8 



admitted, having the following extent of terri- 
tory and representation in Congress: 

States. Square Miles. Senatars. Representatives. 

1. Lnui.-iaiia 41, -246 2 4 

2. MUsouri 65,037 2 7 

3. Arkansas 5-2,191 2 2 

4. Florida 59.268 2 1 

5. Texas 335.389 2 2 



5 Slave States.. ..543,369 



10 



16 



The free States, if any, are yet-to be admitted! 
Kansas and Nebraska, unless tlie unjust legisla- 
tion that opened these free Territories to slavery, 
and the violent measures adopted to establish it 
in Kansas, aidrd and abetted by the present Ad- 
ministration, shall enable slavery to take all, 
even that part once secured to freedom, and from 
whicli slavery was " forever prohibited .'" 

At a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars, 
(over eight hundred millions,) we have obtained 
the Territory for these five new slave States, by 
which the slavoholding section have gained polit- 
ically (and tiiat is the all-important object) ten 
United States Senators and sixteen members of tids 
House ! 

California, it is true, has been admitted as a 
free State; but it was the result of accident. The 
territory acquired of Mexico, like all the rest, 
was acquired for the benefit of the South. The 
discovery of the mineral wealth of California led 
to its rapid settlement and admission as a State, 
before slavery had time to be transplanted there. 

Mr. Chairman, the party with whom I have 
been acting here have been charged with section- 
alism; and why.' Becau.se they are opposed to 
the extension of slavery, and slaveliolding States 
will not unite with them in the election of their 
candidate for President. Now, sir, if the charge 
be true, I ask the candid if it be not our misfor- 
tune rather than our fault.' Must we not, in the 
very nature of things, either be sectional, or give 
up the great struggle.' I am sure, if the South 
will join us, we will give them acordial welcome — 
pledge ourselves to sustain their constitutional 
rights — give them their fairdivision of the patron- ^ 
age of the Government, as we will offer them,! 
(should success crown our labors,) whether they j 
unite with us or not. All this, and even more, : 
would we do, but you spurn us from you — you 
anathematize us with bitter words, and with 
vulgar names — ay, more, when some of your 
own citizens, in the exercise of freemen's rights, 
did come, feeble though their numbers were, to 
represent their State m the convention held for 
all, you drove them from your State; and 1 ask, 
is there no sectionalism in this .' Is there patriot- 
ism in it; or the recognition of the freedom of 
speech, or of conscience.' Sir, what is James 
Buchanan but a sectional candidate.' The great 
Millard Filbnore you have idolized — you even 
now glorify his administration, and call him a 
conservative man — then why do you not support 
him ? Why is it (hat his old friends in tlie South 
are forsaking liim in scores, and going over to 
Buchanan.' Now, when you charge us with sec- 
tionalism, look to it that you are not yourselves 
so sectional, so extreme, tliat you desert the very 
man you admit stood by you; and why do you 
desert him.' Simply because he says he was 



opposed to the violation of the Missouri compro- 
mise, and you fear that he might favor its resto- 
ration. What, I ask, is all this but sectionalism — 
but ultraism .' Look at Kentucky. The friends 
of Mr. Fillmore in the North liad hoped, and had 
counted on Kentucky; but see how she has gone! 
What encouragement i.s this for conservative 
northern men .' No, sir, the truth is not to be 
disguised; it is a sectional figlit, growing out of 
a contest between free labor and slave labor, and 
the violation of a fair, sacred, and time-honored 
compromise; and the South goes for him who 
goes furtiiest, even the Cincinnati platform in 
which James Buchanan lias lost h's identity ! 

This, Mr. Chairman, I have seen from the first, 
and for that' very reason I have gone for Mr. 
, Fremont. Mr. Fillmore personally is my pref- 
erence. I believe in his honesty, his patriotism, 
his great ability, but more especially would I go 
for liim because he goes for the principles of 
the American party. But, sir, I must now go 
for John C. Fremont if 1 would see the party de- 
feated who have brought all this trouble, this 
civil war, and blood on us. The great question 
stares us in the face, and must be met, and I 
would appeal to the opponents of tjie Democratic 
party, what chance, what hope have you of the 
election of Mr. Fillmore .' Is there a single south- 
ern State that he can carry.' I had hope at one 
time that there was; but now all hope is gone. 
; Kentucky has shown her hand. Tennessee was 
! considered favorable; but is there a man here that 
[ listened to the speech of one of her able Senators 
j as he took his leave of Mr. Fillmore, that can 
j hope for success there .' Maryland has been 
thought most sure of all the souihern States; but 
: both her Senators, Mr. Pearce and Mr. Pratt, 
have come out openly for Buchanan; and I ask 
the friends of Mr. Fillmore, to what southern 
i State can you look with confidence .' To my 
I mind it is hopeless; and in view of this deterin- 
i ination of the South, what will the North do.' 
] What ought she to do .' Throw away her votes, 
give up the great struggle for free labor, submit 
tamely to the violation of the Missouri compro- 
mise, the wrongs and outrages perpetrated on the 
free-Slate people of Kansas, while their blood cries 
for an avenger, and the smoldering ashes of their 
dwellings arepleadingtheir cause.' Submittamely 
while even your own statesmen, your brethren arc 
now confined in prisons and wearing chains for the 
pretended violation of infamous laws, passed by a 
" bogus" Legislature — a Legislature elected by 
fraudulent voters from Missouri, enacting laws 
which would have disgraced the dark ages, and 
which were condemned as unconstitutional even 
by a Democratic Senate ! Submit without offer- 
ing relief to these men, still confined in their dark 
and gloomy cells for exercising the right of free- 
dom of judgment and freedom of speech, though 
all these wrongs and sulFcrings are appealing to 
you .' 

What, I ask, will you do .' For my part I have 
made up my inind to go for the candidate who 
will carry with him the North, the East, and the 
West, just as surely as did the Republicans elect 
Blair in Missouri, or as the State of Iowa gave 
six thousand majority for them. 



W46 




'^^ ^ , 









^^ 













D W 









a5°x. 







• T* .0 
















a5°<v 






v..*"- 









> V^^'S^^ ^^^'^Z ^^/^^\/ "O^^^- 



ntv.lle F^ 

fet 19S'; 









